High CourtsSingle Bench(2017) 04 GUJ CK 0092

NAYAK PRANAYKUMAR MA.NUBHAI vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

Gujarat High Court · Decided on 25 April 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.Y. Kogje
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
7876 of 2012

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

85 paragraphs · 690 words
1.

This petition is file with a prayer for

quashing of Criminal Case No.171 of 2012 filed before the

Court of JMFC at Unjha. Such complaint is filed on

13.04.2012 under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act.

2.

In the complaint, it is alleged that on account

of financial difficulties faced by the accused

(petitioner herein), he had borrowed amount of Rs.5 lakhs

from the complainant (respondent No.2). It is alleged

that cheque No.302640 of SBI, Visnagar Branch dated

15.03.2012 for an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- was issued in

favour of respondent No.2 in part satisfaction of the

amount borrowed. When such cheque was deposited with the

Bank, it was dishonoured with an endorsement that opening

balance is insufficient. Statutory notice issued by

respondent No.2 was not responded to by the petitioner

and hence, impugned complaint was filed before JMFC,

Unjha. After recording of verification, process has been

issued by order dated 13.04.2012.

3.

This Court by order dated 20.06.2012 issued

Rule notice and granted interim relief, by which further

proceedings were stayed and the matter was ordered to be

heard with Criminal Misc.Application No.4987 of 2012.

Thereafter, fresh Rule was issued by order dated

08.01.2016 and it appears that, Rule is served upon the

complainant. However, the complainant (respondent No.2

herein) has chosen not to appear despite effective

service of Rule.

4.

Heard Mr.Dakshesh Mehta, learned Advocate for

the petitioner and learned APP Mr.K.L.Pandya for

respondent No.1-State.

5.

Mr.Dakshesh Mehta, learned Advocate for the

petitioner submitted that the petition, with which the

present petition was ordered to be heard with, viz.

Criminal Misc.Application No.4987 of 2012, has been

allowed by this Court by oral judgment dated 02.09.2016,

wherein M.Case No.9 of 2012, filed under the order of

JMFC, Unjha, has been ordered to be quashed and set

aside. He submitted that the present complaint is

nothing but an arm-twisting method as the petitioner is

husband of one Anjanaben, who is having an extramarital

affair with the complainant (respondent No.2 herein) and

by taking advantage of such situation, he has come in

possession of cheque in question and now the same is

being misused. Otherwise, he contended that the

petitioner has no business relation with the respondent

complainant and that at no point of time, there was any

legally enforceable debt for which the cheque could have

been issued by the petitioner.

6.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner further

submitted that as the petitioner was being threatened

from time to time on account of illicit affair with

Anjanaben, the petitioner has preempted legal

consequences of several complaints at the hands of his

wife and respondent No.2 herein. He had, therefore,

addressed notice dated 22.03.2012 to the concerned Police

Station including DSP, Mahesana bringing to the notice

that petitioner is likely to be faced with several and

frivolous complaints and his fear is now a reality as his

wife has also filed criminal case against him and as

respondent No.2 is having affair with his wife, has filed

the present complaint.

7.

Learned APP submitted that appropriate order

may be passed by the Court.

8.

Perusal of the case papers would clearly

indicate that there does not appear to be any business or

commercial relation between the petitioner and respondent

No.2 and as is indicated in the notice addressed to DSP,

the wife of the petitioner and respondent have joined

hands to initiate frivolous complaint. One such

complaint which is filed by the wife being M.Case No.9 of

2012 is already quashed by the coordinate Bench vide oral

judgment dated 02.09.2016.

9.

The absence of the respondent to defend his

complaint before this Court is also conspicuous and

therefore, it appears that respondent No.2 is no more

interested in prosecuting the complaint. In view of the

aforesaid, there is no reason to withstand the present

complaint, which appears to be filed with frivolous

object of harassing the petitioner and thus, abuse of

process of law.

10.

In view of the aforesaid, Criminal Case No.171

of 2012 filed before the Court of JMFC at Unjha is hereby

ordered to be quashed and set aside. The petition is

allowed. Rule is made absolute.